Hello,
I did own a Sigma 85mm and now own a Canon 85mm 1.2 and did carefully field test an 85mm Milvus before making the decision; I believe that I can help.
I think I understand your autofocus vs. manual focus question but am not entirely sure. I will share my perspective on this question and then get to the lenses.
First; I use 85mm for two primary purposes - portraits and landscapes where the perspective is one of my most used as it suites me. I want a lens that auto-focuses accurately with handheld and that I can somewhat focus manually handheld but that can be sharp as a tack when focused on the tripod with live view..for reference, I use a Canon 5DSr (and love it by the way). However, it is clear that handheld manual focusing with the needed precision is not the province of today's DSLR's with focusing screens optimized for AF (among other factors). I had the original Zeiss 85mm 1.4 for years and had good results manual focusing until the resolution of my bodies grew past 21mp (5D3 territory - yes, I did experiment with 3rd party focusing screens).
With this as a preamble, I owned a Sigma 85mm 1.4 for a few years.
I tested the Sigma 85mm, Canon 85mm, and Zeiss milvus 85mm in short distance/infinity landscape situations (tripod) and handheld portrait situations.
My results:
For handheld portrait: the Sigma and Canon AF is good if you microadjust and give care. I could see, and loved, the extra smoothing effect of the Canon at 1.2. The Zeiss at 1.4 was excellent but no better than the Canon in the corners or the center. By F 5.6 all lenses were close - slight edge to the Canon/Zeiss.
For Tripod close landscape: The Zeiss and Canon were demonstrably better at wide open across the field. The Zeiss was better somewhat in the corners (where a flat wall/etc would show this compared to a portrait). By F5.6 the Zeiss and Canon were equivalent and sightly ahead of the Sigma but not by that much.
For Tripod infinity landscape: The Zeiss, Canon, Sigma were all equally good in the center but the Zeiss and Canon pulled ahead on the corners (wide open). By F5.6 the Zeiss and Canon were ahead. This was the greatest surprise to me - I fully expected the Zeiss to be superior optically in this circumstance; it was not according to my results (please no micro-minutae questions on testing...I was tripod mounted, LV, landscape with enough flare etc. similar to my normal subject matter).
My decision: I sold the Sigma, kept the Canon, and returned the Zeiss to Lens Rentals. I am very happy with the decision. The Canon is not perfect - the AF is slow, there is some focus shift at close distances; but the lens is solid and a versatile performer for both landscape and portrait if you know it.
If it were me, I may be tempted to wait a bit..Canon is rumored to be readying a new version - their new L lenses have been exceptional. It is not un-reasonable to assume that they would address the 85's weaknesses....however more $$ will certainly be on the table.
Best of luck with your decision.
